Legal Opinion
Hillis Homes, Inc. v. Public Utility District No. 1
Washington Supreme Court
Decided February 27, 1986No. 50699-0PublishedCited by 42 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtAndersen, J.
Facts of Case
Hillis Homes, Inc., challenges the validity of a general facilities charge exacted by Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County (the District) upon new customers desiring to connect to the District's water system.
Following a trial to the court, the trial court concluded and held that the charge was authorized by statute, was not invalid as a tax, was not discriminatory or unreasonable, and did not constitute a deprivation of property without due process of law. We accepted direct review.
The facts of the case as found by the trial court, and on the basis of which it…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Contractors & Builders Ass'n v. City of DunedinSupreme Court of Florida · 1976
- Hillis Homes, Inc. v. Snohomish CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2002
- Teter v. Clark CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1985
- Carlton Santee Corp. v. Padre Dam Municipal Water DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
- Associated Homebuilders of the Greater East Bay, Inc. v. City of LivermoreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Covell v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1995
- Arborwood Idaho v. City of KennewickWashington Supreme Court · 2004
- Arborwood Idaho, L.L.C. v. City of KennewickWashington Supreme Court · 2004
- King County Fire Protection District No. 16 v. Housing AuthorityWashington Supreme Court · 1994
- Margola Associates v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1993
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.